Register.com claims that 90% of Mac users hate Aqua/OS X - Page 3

I was wondering why a domain name registrar would have anything to say about this...

Register.com is where I registered my domains...

TheRegister.co.uk is a pile of steaming turd. The people there must have the same sources Ryan Meader has, because the rumors generated are just as horrible. Sometimes you'll find stuff at that is just plain inaccurate.

You have to be really diluted to believe this one. Funny about your experience with OS X Scott but, I have a G4 450/640 mgs of RAM/ Radeon AGP and it doesn't seem slow to me ( and I really don't see that spinning CD a lot at all ).

Maybe it has something to do with me optimizing with Norton Speed Disk. My experiences are not the same. Yes the GUI in 9 is a bit snappier but, not that much.

Sure there are people who don't liike Aqua/OS X but not even close to 90%. Not enough people reading their rag I suppose.

[ 01-12-2002: Message edited by: jimmac ]</p>

Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination

About the speed of OS X. I argued this crap almost a year ago. Back in those days there was all this bull sh*t about " Aqua won't get any faster because it needs new hardware to get faster "..........well guess what? It got faster on the same hardware! All those lame theories about it being Quartz's fault and removing the debugg code or optimizing won't help. Geeeeeeeeez! I'm not going to argue with people who are just WRONG and have already been proven wrong time and again.

[ 01-12-2002: Message edited by: jimmac ]</p>

Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination

[quote]Originally posted by jimmac:
<strong>About the speed of OS X. I argued this crap almost a year ago. Back in those days their was all this bull sh*t about " Aqua won't get any faster because it needs new hardware to get faster "..........well guess what? It got faster on the same hardware! I'm not going to argue with people who are just WRONG and have already been proven wrong time and again.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Yes OS X has gotten A LOT faster. I just hope next release will even be faster. It needs to be faster.

The crucial memorandum will be snared in the out-basket bythe paper clip of the overlying memo and go to file.

Why is Java faster in Classic than in OS X? Not the hallmark of a fast OS.

Quartz didn't get any faster. Apple tweeked the Aqua UI. THey learned some tricks to make some window resizing faster. That's about it. I never thought quartz was a slow down though. Just a memory hog.

Yes OS X has gotten A LOT faster. I just hope next release will even be faster. It needs to be faster.</strong><hr></blockquote>

IMO it hasn't. The only real speed up I ever got was when I installed the dev tools which did the update prebinding that the OS X installer forgot to do. Then up to 10.1 where was no speed increase I could tell. It's not "A LOT" faster.

Java is slower in OSX than classic? That would be pretty sad since java is so slow in OS9 I turn it off.

Just a question=Can't aqua be turned off? I thought Apple was getting complaints from graphics pros about the blue color and Apple gave the option to switch to Platinum? I don't have OSX yet so I apologize for not being sure about it.

As for OSX the few times I've used it I didn't like it as much as 9, but time will tell. The few things I really think need to be changed are the colored widgets at the top of the windows instead if icons. The icons are much easier to recognize for the function they perform than colored circles.

The other concern is with the dock-I think Apple should make it optional. Have it be the fefault setting because it would be easier for Windows users but give us the option of turning it off and using the old finder. I'm sure I will get used to it, though............................................ ..

[quote]Originally posted by steve666:
<strong>Java is slower in OSX than classic? That would be pretty sad since java is so slow in OS9 I turn it off.

Just a question=Can't aqua be turned off? I thought Apple was getting complaints from graphics pros about the blue color and Apple gave the option to switch to Platinum? I don't have OSX yet so I apologize for not being sure about it.

As for OSX the few times I've used it I didn't like it as much as 9, but time will tell. The few things I really think need to be changed are the colored widgets at the top of the windows instead if icons. The icons are much easier to recognize for the function they perform than colored circles.

The other concern is with the dock-I think Apple should make it optional. Have it be the fefault setting because it would be easier for Windows users but give us the option of turning it off and using the old finder. I'm sure I will get used to it, though............................................ ..</strong><hr></blockquote>

no it can't be turned off. You can change the blue for grey, but it's still the same interface, just sans colour.

Aqua is the what the UI is called. Like Platinum. Quartz is the display engine that people claim is slow. Like Quickdraw. It cannot be turned off.

[quote]Originally posted by steve666:
<strong>I thought Apple was getting complaints from graphics pros about the blue color and Apple gave the option to switch to Platinum? I don't have OSX yet so I apologize for not being sure about it.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Nope. No platinum. You can turn them a gray color.

[quote]Originally posted by steve666:
<strong>As for OSX the few times I've used it I didn't like it as much as 9, but time will tell. The few things I really think need to be changed are the colored widgets at the top of the windows instead if icons. The icons are much easier to recognize for the function they perform than colored circles.</strong><hr></blockquote>

I never thought "box with two horizontal lines through it" connoted window shade nor did "box with smaller box" connoted zoom unzoom. You have to click on them to know what they do. I can't see how the OS X way is any worse.

[quote]Originally posted by steve666:
<strong>The other concern is with the dock-I think Apple should make it optional. Have it be the fefault setting because it would be easier for Windows users but give us the option of turning it off and using the old finder. I'm sure I will get used to it, though............................................ ..</strong><hr></blockquote>

Many dock haters now like it after using it for several weeks. I have my issues but I'm on board, no pun....

[quote]Originally posted by BobtheTomato:
<strong>I have a Sawtooth G4/400 with 768 MB of RAM and X runs pretty doggone good. If I am losing any time on speed I am making it up by restarting once every few days instead of 1-2 times a day. There's a lot to do with X yet, but I think Apple has a very solid start.
DVD playback isn't perfect, but then again it wasn't with 9 either.</strong><hr></blockquote>

same machine here but with 640MB RAM and a radeon

As I have said OS X is not where I would like. both speed wise and features. the speed is really dissapointing IMO. I thought a a modern OS that took away all the things holding OS 9 back and that was fully PPC native would show some great responsiveness. It most certainly doesn't. Note I am talking responsiveness not raw speed like RC5 or OpenGL fps. The responsiveness is not where it should be. A few number crunching apps and the gui is horrible. QT uses may too much CPU and occasionally can't handle some large data rate movies when OS 9 can easily. 10.1 was a miracle in improvement but it is still not where I think it should be.

the strange thing is that you have problems with the DVD Player. IMO the DVD Player is flawless. it simply runs great. My only hope is that they eventually add DD5.1 output capabilities to the player and macs and that they add DTS downmixing

Oh my god! Yes, deluded is the correct useage. Well Scott, we both made the same mistake. My only excuse was that I was typing that while I was getting ready for work. Yes I work on Saturdays. I work for events at Willamette University ( that probably makes the boo, boo that much worse ) and a lot of stuff was going on today.

Well I just got home and I think I'm going to dilute a little rum with a little coke ( it's been a pretty trying day ). Of course if you slam your head against the wall enough times you might think we had it right.

[ 01-13-2002: Message edited by: jimmac ]</p>

Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination

Well i didn't really like OSX either and I'm still not sure about it, but I'm using it on my iBook 500 with 192 mg of ram. I liked iPhoto, and it only runs on X so what is a guy to do. I loaded X, I loaded all my images, and I bought a book, the one by David Pogue. I seem to be doing alright so far. It only took me a couple hours to figure out how to get my slick transitions and effects into iMovie on OSX and I learned how to set permissions so that students I let use my computer can't nose about in my stuff. So far I'm laughing. I'm not saying X comes easy, and the machines are definitely a little slow running it. But five years from now, computers will be zipping along on it, the problems of 9 will be long forgotten. I remember when I bought my 6100 with OS 7.1, some ppl refused to give up system 6, they just didn't see the advantages of 7. But I never met anyone who started on 7 and went back to 6. I don't think this is going to be much different.

[quote]Originally posted by Scott H.:
<strong>IMO it hasn't. The only real speed up I ever got was when I installed the dev tools which did the update prebinding that the OS X installer forgot to do. Then up to 10.1 where was no speed increase I could tell. It's not "A LOT" faster.</strong><hr></blockquote>WTF! LOL. You "couldn't tell" the speed difference between 10.0 and 10.1!? Are you blind? Geez, apparently you only notice what you want to notice, when you want to notice it.

If I came up to you on the street and bitch slapped you across your head, would you notice?

I switched to OS X full-time when 10.1 came out. I didn't have much use for it until then because it didn't connect to my NT server.

For the most part I like it. It's not as bulletproof as I had hoped it would be. The Classic enviroment, while it probably represents the best job that anyone could possibly do, is still clumsy. And the Dock is still pretty awkward. I hate having to keep the Dock hidden, but Classic apps were not written with the dock in mind, and windows in general that fall behind the Dock you can't resize without either moving the window or hiding the Dock.

[quote]Originally posted by Mr.Potatohead:
<strong> I hate having to keep the Dock hidden, but Classic apps were not written with the dock in mind, and windows in general that fall behind the Dock you can't resize without either moving the window or hiding the Dock.

There ought to be an option to keep stuff from going behind the Dock.</strong><hr></blockquote>

You could move the dock to the side or just move it for a moment as well. To move without using the menus press and hold shift on your keyboard, then grab the Dock's resize bar and move it out of your way. (Sorry, I have already posted this in another thread, but I love it!!)

NoahJ"It is unwise to be too sure of one's own wisdom. It is healthy to be reminded that the strongest might weaken and the wisest might err." - Mahatma Gandhi

I am not sure how anyone can move from 10.0 to 10.1 and not see a speed improvement. I don't think that is at all possible. Not even on slower hardware where the greatest speed improvement was seen. What machine do you have Scott? My G4 400 Sawtooth showed a huge leap when I went to 10.1...

NoahJ"It is unwise to be too sure of one's own wisdom. It is healthy to be reminded that the strongest might weaken and the wisest might err." - Mahatma Gandhi

[quote]Originally posted by NoahJ:
<strong>I am not sure how anyone can move from 10.0 to 10.1 and not see a speed improvement. I don't think that is at all possible. Not even on slower hardware where the greatest speed improvement was seen. What machine do you have Scott? My G4 400 Sawtooth showed a huge leap when I went to 10.1...</strong><hr></blockquote>

I've been using ?? version of OS 10 ever since I got my 867. I have used OS 9 as emulated in classic more than I have had to boot into OS 9 stand alone. I always shut it (9) down when I'm done with it, and go right back into OS 10 (without emulating 9). And after 10.1, and 10.1.2 updates I don't even like OS 9 anymore. My new favorite site is SourceForge, and the OS X community is just starting to grow there, and it's an impressive one. UNIX ports are pouring in, and I'm loving it. OS 9 is the past like Elvis. Get on with your life. Elvis IS Dead

All that aside, the only time I go to the register is when someone here mentions it. I would forget it existed if people didn't. The stories are few, and far between (just like the front page of AI), and they usually don't amount to anything anyways.

OS 10 rules. If Apple was still using OS 9 as their main OS I would be using some version of NIX by now. Probably on a x86 box. I was getting pretty attached to yellow dog, before OS X Beta was available, and I had been seriously considering it (Linux,/ Debian, or Suse) on a faster x86 box before it (X Beta) was released.

I've been using ?? version of OS 10 ever since I got my 867. I have used OS 9 as emulated in classic more than I have had to boot into OS 9 stand alone. I always shut it (9) down when I'm done with it, and go right back into OS 10 (without emulating 9). And after 10.1, and 10.1.2 updates I don't even like OS 9 anymore. My new favorite site is SourceForge, and the OS X community is just starting to grow there, and it's an impressive one. UNIX ports are pouring in, and I'm loving it. OS 9 is the past like Elvis. Get on with your life. Elvis IS Dead

All that aside, the only time I go to the register is when someone here mentions it. I would forget it existed if people didn't. The stories are few, and far between (just like the front page of AI), and they usually don't amount to anything anyways.

OS 10 rules. If Apple was still using OS 9 as their main OS I would be using some version of NIX by now. Probably on a x86 box. I was getting pretty attached to yellow dog, before OS X Beta was available, and I had been seriously considering it (Linux,/ Debian, or Suse) on a faster x86 box before it (X Beta) was released.

[quote]Originally posted by steve666:
<strong>The other concern is with the dock-I think Apple should make it optional. Have it be the fefault setting because it would be easier for Windows users but give us the option of turning it off and using the old finder. I'm sure I will get used to it, though.</strong><hr></blockquote>

The Dock and the Finder don't really have anything to do with each other. If you mean you want windowshading back, there's a $7 haxie called WindowshadeX that will restore it for you. Install that, then set the Dock to Hide (or replace it with a 3rd-party launcher like DragThing) and go on about your business. You can set the Finder to work just like the old one did.

Anyways, the topic of the thread is a bit misleading, its 90% of their responses as noted in the first post.

However, I agree that it sounds made up, fact is I have only talked to maybe 3-4 Mac users that don't like Mac OS X of the 30+ in our user group round these parts. Maybe the aqua haters are hiding but if that were the case I don't they would all send in so many emails.

First, let me publicly reverse my previously posted whine about how 'the first to get a tablet computer to market place gets my money'. I plead temporary insanity, driven to the edge by my unresolved grief over the death of the Newton.

Now, to the thread topic: I WON'T use anything prior ot OS X. I love this damned OS. Since I finally found drivers for my epson scanner, I've got EVERYTHING that I need to stay in the bliss-ful OS X universe until the heir apparent, Lisa Jobs, Future CEO of Apple-Microsoft, Inc. leads us back into the OS wilderness with OS 100.

Remember, we're trying to take marketshare from Microsoft. The windows people, shattered, and abused wretches that they are, will need an easy, gentle transition to the OS that they've been avoiding for so long. OS X (to them) will be 'just like Windows XP' with two important exceptions:
1. It works.
2. It's fun.
2.a. And the computer it's on is cool too!

My mania about getting my meathooks on a Newton successor is rapidly being replaced by an emerging obsession with the new iMac. Everytime I look at it, and its specs, it just looks better and better.

But I've first gotta snag two Tangerine iBooks for my 6 and 4 year old red-head little girls.

Best to all and to all a good night!

Aries 1B

"I pictured myself sitting in the shade of a leafy tree in a public park, a stylus in hand, a shiny Apple Tablet computer in my lap, and a pouty Jennifer Connelly stirring a pitcher of gimlets a...

nonsuch:
The Dock and the Finder don't really have anything to do with each other. If you mean you want windowshading back, there's a $7 haxie called WindowshadeX that will restore it for you. Install that, then set the Dock to Hide (or replace it with a 3rd-party launcher like DragThing) and go on about your business. You can set the Finder to work just like the old one did.

Sorry, I always say finder when I mean to say application switcher, at the top right hand of OS9............................................... ......

Guy Tribble recently (re)integrated Apple : before his position as Vice president of software engeneering at Next, he was
leading the software engeering staff at Apple, overseeing the Mac OS developpement (mainly framework, GUI and applications). He is a (the) recognized specialist of GUI and wanted to attain the Graal of the perfect GUI runing with Unix.
It rings some bells : I hope he will improve Aqua to what it can be, the best Graphic User Interface on a computer.